The "great Armenian horrors' boom"

 If anyone wishes to form an idea of how Armenian atrocities are manufactured and exaggerated, let him read the Blue-books on "affairs at Aleppo," 1879. The London papers, inspired by the "patriots," announced, with a great flourish of trumpets, that 500 Armenians had been tortured and massacred in the neighbourhood of that city; and there was, so to speak, a great Armenian horrors' boom all over the western world and America too. Well, after all this sensationalism, the number of slain was eventually reduced by our own and the American consuls to eight.

1896 propaganda from an American book, about Sasoun. Here's an account as to how many really died.

Within the past six weeks the London papers have been gloating over the "atrocities" committed upon Armenians at, and in, Sasoun. The number of the killed was at first 2,000, then 3,000, and finally, thanks to a telegram from Boston, from "one who had received a letter from Sasoun" — how the letter had time to reach America, and how it had been allowed to get out of Turkey, were details never explained! — it was declared that the "massacred Armenians exceeded 10,000." In all these despatches, and in the articles commenting upon them, Sasoun is almost invariably described as a "town" or "village." As a matter of fact Sasoun is neither the one nor the other, but a wild district in the Upper Valley of the Tchai-Batam, a branch of the Tigris, and separated from the basin of the Euphrates by high mountains. It is remoter from Erzeroum, but about equal distance from Diabekir, Mousch, and Bitlis. Nothing can be imagined more terrifically grand than the scenery of this desolate country. The gorges and ravines which cross it are as dreadfully gloomy as the one described by Shelley's Beatrice. A score of cataracts and waterfalls tumble headlong from the black precipices, and gathering together their waters rush desperately towards the Tigris and Euphrates, at the foot of the various dangerous defiles and passes.

 ADDENDUM: Below is the article, in full.

 

TURKEY AND ARMENIA.

Anyone who takes the trouble to read books of travel in Turkey, published not earlier than twenty years ago, must acknowledge that a wonderful progress has been made in the country in the present reign. Abdul Ahmed has done more for education than all the Sultans, his predecessors, put together. It would take pages to enumerate the educational establishments he has founded or favoured. He is, I should think, the only sovereign in Europe who entertains at a picnic annually all the school-children of both sexes in his capital, and of every denomination. He has endowed the Ottoman University with many scholarships, and founded schools of law and medicine. Breaking with all the traditions of Muhammedanism, he has given a free hand to His Excellency Hamdi Bey to organize in the descried kiosks in the Old Seraglio a splendid museum of sculpture and antiquities, and has attached to it a capital school of fine art and design. Needless to say the education imparted in these schools is not perhaps all that might be desired. This cannot be expected. Everything is too new. Teachers of what we should consider third order, even, are sadly needed. But it is a step in the right direction, and its ultimate results may indeed be surprising, for the population of Turkey—Muhammedan and Christian—Is remarkably intelligent. It is curious, however, that the Sultan, who has opened out excellent roads in the provinces, should neglect, those in the immediate vicinity of his capital. This is probably due to that, morbid nervousness which prevents his leaving the confines of Yildiz, and realising for himself the filthy condition of the ill-paved dog-infested. streets of Constantinople.

Unfortunately, Abdul Ahmed, by concentrating the reins of government in his own hands, has established, in his dominions two terrible curses; a system of espionage which renders life unendurable for anyone in the least connected with political life; and a censorship, the silliness of which baffles belief. The spy system is sapping the foundations of the "Empire, demoralising even otherwise honourable men. It is one of the indirect causes of the troubles in Armenia and other parts of the Empire ; when a man is paid to spy upon his neighbours, you may be certain that when he has nothing to report, he invents, and thus many an Armenian has been dragged to jail simply because some official spy was beginning to feel that there was no work for his idle hands to do. The childish obstacles thrown in the way of honourable correspondents, who earnestly wish to be just, and to give accurate news to the papers they represent, I firmly believe to be one of the reasons for the exaggerated, reports which are appearing about Armenian atrocities.

It is impossible to withhold sympathy and respect for a Sultan of such blameless private life as Abdul Ahmed, who works incessantly at what he believes to be the welfare of his people. To accuse him, as I have seen lately, even in respectable English papers, of being a sort of Tackleton who delights in tormenting his Armenian subjects as that worthy did in scrunching crickets, is not only unjust but in preposterously bad taste. In the first place, the Sultan is so free from the spirit oi cruelty which disgraced some of his ancestors, that it is difficult to get him to sign even the death-warrant of a murderer. He invariably commutes the sentence to imprisonment. He has much to contend with. The old Oriental spirit has not yet passed away, and so far the reforms have only influenced the capital and the larger cities, and these only superficially. Fanaticism is still rampant, and Yildiz, like the Seraglio of the "ood old times," contains all the dramatis personae of the tales of Sheherazalde, the eunuchs, mollahs, pashas, beys, astrologers, slaves, sultanas, kadines, dancing-women, Circassian and, Georgian odalisques, whose main object in existence is their own self-advancement. Above this ant-hill of picturesque folk the interesting figure of the Sultan stands out in striking relief. lHe seems to be watching the West, watching for the return of that civilisation which ages ago started from the land of the rising sun on her troublesome pilgrimage, which has ended at the golden gates of San Francisco. She is returning, and very fast too, for she comes three times a week bv the Orient Express; she sleeps at the Grand Hotel de Pera; she takes a luxurious steamer for Jaffa; thence by train to Jerusalem, stopping at the buffet Jericho, dix minutes d'arret, for luncheon. When she is comfortably installed in Zion's brand new hotel, she purchases a twopenny tramcar fare to the Holy Sepulchre. Decidedly she is not picturesque! She is, however, essentially utilitarian. There is no driving her back. The Sheik-ul-Islara himself and all his mollahs could not do it. By-and-by she will send the pilgrims to Mecca by train de luxe; or who knows, perhaps by balloon.

However, be this as it may, education has firmly established itself in Turkey. What the result on Muhammedanism will be, time alone will show. It stands to reason, however, that in course of time Islam, if it is to endure, will be obliged, to accommodate itself to a great intellectual change. "God made the world," the Muhammedan still repeats, "why do you want to know how He made it? If we wish to be happy, we have only to do nothing wicked, obey the Koran, and wait patiently until Allah calls us to our reward." This fatalistic doctrine was possible in other times. There is an unrest to-day in the hearts of the peoples of the whole world; they are gathering together in one common bond whose object is implacable war against falsehood and cruelty. Science and reason are synonymous, and unless both are thoroughly and reverently understood by education, education becomes worse than useless. If Islam can throw off her lethargy and her fatalism, and frankly accept what the Christian religions have been obliged to accept, humanitarian progress, well and good. Under these circumstances alone can we say of her, that her mission is not ended. I had several conversations with learned Sheiks, who spoke to me in this sense. They apparently believe that the Koran can be adapted to altered circumstances, and evidently saw the necessity of great reforms in their religion, as not only possible, but imperative. "Inshallah ! With better educated and progressive men at the helm, Turkey might yet rise to greatness. But the tone of that education might he very different from that of the Galata Serai, which from its position in the heart of Pera, a truly cosmopolitan city, is not calculated to create a high sense of honour and manly dignity in the hearts of its scholars, What I say of this particular school—in the Turkish sense the most important in Turkey-—I say of all French and other foreign Lycees. The instruction may he excellent, but the tone is simply disastrous.

After all, Turkey ia a country in an acute state of transition from an old to a new civilisation. We mast not expect too much from her. We must be patient and firm, but also reasonable. To treat the Sultan, the chief of a great religion, a mighty emperor and an old friend, as if he were a naughty little boy who wantonly breaks his toys, is bad manners. It will do no good, and possibly much harm. It certainly will not solve the Armenian question.

I am pretty certain that if ten Englishmen, who apparently interest themselves so clamorously in the Armenian Question, were cornered and cross-questioned even as to where Armenia is, at least eight of them would answer hesitatingly, "Oh! Armenia—a province in the north of Turkey—to be sure—like Bulgaria, you know principally inhabited by Armenians, whom the Turks persecute because they are Christians Our old friend, Mrs. Gamp used to talk a great deal about a certain Mrs. Harris, but if turned out in the long run that there was no "sich a person." So with Armenia—there is no such place—at present. There was once, but, for many a century it has been merely a geographical expression. In 1242 the whole of Armenia was overrun by the Mongols, and this was undoubtedly the greatest disaster that ever befell the Armenians, for such an enormous number of them were slaughtered that they subsequently never recovered their numerical strength. Sultan Selim I., in 1513, conquered the western half of the kingdom, and the Egyptians subjugated a great portion of the eastern half. A little later the Tartars overran and plundered the plateau of the Taurus, aad the Khurds and the Persians, by their incessant acts of brigandage, made life unbearable to the peaceful Armenian farmers. By this time almost every vestige of ancient civilisation had been swept away, and possibly there is no other country in the world of such undoubted antiquity in which the past imprint of man has left fewer marks. There are, I believe, some very fine and little-known ruins of ancient fortresses and palaces—the villa of Semiramis at Van, for instance, and some exceedingly old monasteries—but otherwise there is very little of interest beyond the splendid scenery to attract the traveller. Mr. H. F. B. Lynch, in his recent admirable series of papers on the Armenian Question, describes the burrows of the Armenian and the Khurd as scarcely discernible in the landscape. The extent of territory included in Turkish Armenia combined could easily accommodate and provide for a population of twenty millions of people. At the present moment the population of both divisions of the plateau of the Taurus does not exceed three millions. On the Turkish side of Mount Ararat the population, according to the best calculation, is about 1,500,000 souls, among them there are, perhaps, 500,000 Armenians, 500,000 Turks, 450,000 Khurds, 5,000 Greeks, others 7,000. On the Russian side the population is about 1,100,000, of whom circa 520,000 are Armenians, The total Armenian population of the world is about 3,000,000, of whom about 2,500,000 are in Turkey, and the rest in other parts of Europe, Egypt, and America. I take these figures rather roughly from three separate sources, from Quinet's Empire Ottoman, published in 1891; from statistics supplied me by the Jesuit missionaries, and those given by Mr. Taylor, our late Consul at Erzeroum, and by Mr. Lynch. But it is almost impossible to obtain an exact census of the population of this part of the world. Tbe Muhammedans, for instance, will not consent to give the number of their women and the Christians, in order to evade the military tax on male children, are extremely reticent; and as to the Khurdish tribes, as they dwell in inaccessible places, they have never been properly counted at all. In their case it is mere guesswork.

The Jesuit missionaries, who make a point of collecting all sorts of information in the countries in which they labour, as a rule count the number of houses; thus, ten houses to the Muhammedans, five to the Armenians, six to the Greeks, and so forth. However, what is essential to my purpose is to show that the kingdom of Armenia has had its confines so frequently changed that it can now only be considered as a geographical expression," and (that the Armenian population is so numerically inferior to that of the other nationalities among which they live that it is absurd to compare their condition with that of the Bulgarians, who were as three to four to the Turks. I will not enter into particulars as to the geography of this interesting part of the world. It has been so admirably and so recently done bv Mr. Lynch. It is quite true, that of all the peoples who inhabit this region, the Armenians are the most remarkable. Descendants, according to their own belief, of Haig, the great-grandson of Japhet, they are much more probably the issue of a cross between the Persians and the various Turanian populations. They have, however, strongly marked Semitic features and peculiarities and are remarkably shrewd in business; so adroit, indeed, are they in their financial transactions, that it is popularly said throughout the East that "no Jew can flourish, within ten miles of an Armenian." When all the tribes among whom they live were lost in the intellectual sloth of barbarism, the Armenians had a noble literature. Almost all the Armenians in Asia speak Turkish, the pure Haican language being, however, taught in the schools. It is a rather curious fact that there are several daily papers published in Turkish expressly with Haican characters for the benefit of such Armenians who cannot speak their national language. A great movement in favour of popular education occurred among them as early as 1830. Assisted by wealthy Armenian emigrants and exiles, they have established schools for boys and girls at Zeitoum, Hadjin, Marasch, Aleppo, Angora, Caesaria, Van, Mouch, Bitlis, Erzeroum, &e. This movement is all the more remarkable when we consider the painful circumstances of their condition, surrounded by horde of armed barbarians, Khurds, Circassians, Lazes, Kazaz, Kizilbaches(devil-worshippers), who have rendered their lives for ages, especially in the rural districts, almost unendurable, and have made their history that of one prolonged martyrdom. It is a mistake, however, to imagine, as some people seem to do, judging from the daily papers, that as the Armenians have only been exposed to these terrors during the last twenty-five years. A few examples taken at random will easily prove the contrary.

In the year 404 John Chrysostom, after having denounced in burning words, and to her face too, the evil life led by the Empress Eudoxia in Constntinople, was exiled to Cacusus, a small-town situated in one of the valleys of the Taurus, at a point where the high road, leading from Cappadocia into Persia, is crossed by another passing through the Syrian provinces of Upper Armenia. It was a military station of some little importance, established to ensure the safety of the few travellers who went that way. The saint tells us himself that the town was a wretchced little place, from the walls of which you could see, dotting the valley below, the rare huts of the peasantry. Here he dwelt with one, Dioscorus, but he was not long installed in his new quarters when a heavy fall of snow covered with its mantle the town and its neighbourhood. It was so extremely cold, St. John says, that it was impossible for him, in the enfeebled state in which he then was, to leave his chamber. Some of his friends came one day to him with the appalling news that the Isaurians—read Khurds—had descended from their lairs in tlie mountains into the plain below. In a few days they ascended to the town, which they began to pillage. The soldiers in the garrison were powerless to defend the place, and the brigands plundered the houses of the wealthy, burnt farms, carried off the women and cattle, and massacred all who ventured to oppose them. John Chrysostom, with many others of the unfortunate inhabitants, fled into the woods, and, after many adventures, eventually reached the city of Arabissus. The Isauriaans, when they had devastated Cacusus, followed the refugees and continued their depredations. "Like ferocious beasts," says the great orator, "they fell upon the unhappy inhabitants of Armenia and devoured them. Trouble and disorder are everywhere. Hundreds of men, women, and children have been massacred; others have been frozen to death. The towns and villages are desolated; everywhere you see blood; everywhere you hear the groans of the dying, the shouts of the victors, and. the sobs and the tears of the vanquished." In reading the passages in the letters of St. John Chrysostom referring to this matter, one would almost imagine oneself reading a sensational account in one of our evening papers headed "Fresh outrages in Armenia."

When I was in Genoa some yeara ago I translated some documents connected with a very ancient, so-called likeness of the Saviour, preserved in the Armenian church of St. Bartholomew in that city. From them I learnt that somewhere in the first quarter of the fourteenth century foar Basilian monks arrived from the neighbourhood of Van, and implored the Archbishop uf Genoa, Porchetto Spinola, to whom they were recommended by a Latin priest in Constantinople, to grant them permission to found a monastery of their order in his diocese. They were kindly received by the Archbishop, on whom their narrative of the dreadful massacres in their native country, from which they had escaped, produced a profound impression. The "savages and the Saracens" had, they assured him, desolated their villages, burnt and pillaged their monasteries, and massacred so many people that the stench of their unburied bodies had produced a dreadful plague. Passing over several centuries, we come to the eighteenth, when the unsafe condition of the Christian population in Asia Minor began to attract the attention of Europe. The archives of the Franciscan and Jesuit missionaries contain hundreds of minute accounts of fearful visitations of the Khurds, and other barbarous tribes, in the plateaux of the Taurus and elsewhere in Armenia. In 1895, a massacre took place which was the subject of diplomatic representations to Sultan Mahmud II. I have before me, whilst I am writing, a report presented by the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople to the Sultan in 1876, It gives a long and concise list of the yearly massacres and vexations to which the Armenians in the Taurus regions and in Asia Minor had been subjected during the years extending from 1860 to 1877. Armenian massacres are, therefore, literally as old as the nation itself. The most wonderful feature about, them is, that the Armenians have not long ago followed the example of the man in the Gospel, and taken up their beds and walked. But unlike the Turks, who can make their homes anywhere, the Armenians have an exaggerated affection for the roof that shelters them.

About 1850 an emigration commenced, especially from Constanstinople, of a better class of Armenians than had hitherto appeared in any considerable numbers in the rest of Europe and America. Wealthy Armenian merchants now began to establish branch houses connected with their business in Boston, Philadelphia, London, and Paris, and sent thither their sons to superintend them. The plan has evidently succeeded, for I am assured at the present moment that there are not less than 6,000 Armenians in the city of Boston alone, and what is more, that they are all well-to-do people. That love of self-improvement, which has distinguished the Armenians under even the most adverse circumstances, and has raised them above their neighbours, is one of their marked features wherever they go. They study at our schools and universities with admirable results; but although one or two generations may be born among us, like their first cousins the Jews, they never thoroughly assimilate themselves with us. They remain, a people apart. Their love of their desolated and unpeopled fatherland, even though they have have never visited it, is intense ; and they dream that the day may come when they shall be gathered together amid the corn and the cotton fields, the vines and the splendid forests of that glorious country where Semiramis was wont to pass the summer months.

Imbued, both in America, England and France, with liberal, not to say revolutionary, ideas, they are easily deceived by certain adventurers of their own race, professional patriots I will call them, who find that their patriotism pays them well. I have had personal acquaintance with more than one of these gentlemen, and I confess that, although I cannot lift my hat to their integrity, I must make them a profound bow for their uncommon shrewdness and plausibility. Their industry is incessant. Thez form associations, and, by their singular persuasiveness, manage to obtain permission -- sometimes enthusiastically granted -- to place certain conspicuous names upon their committee lists. Their well-organised meetings are not unfrequently presided over by cabinet ministers and other distinguished persons, who should really know better than to have anything whatever to do with such proceedings. Every man of heart must admire, nay reverence, the nobility of the Armenian character, and its steadfast adherence to its old institutions and its ancient religion, through sorrows and trials which would have driven other peoples to despair, and applaud their pluck in keeping their wrongs before the public. But surely it is not for us to endorse falsehoods and exaggerations without taking the trouble to verify them. A few examples will serve my purpose better than a long dissertation. One of these associations established in London publishes a little newspaper yclepy [sic] The Anglo-Armenian Gazette. I cull a few gems from its columns to show the method with which these "patriots" work. In the February number for 1894 I find this: "Some thirty years ago an Armenian published a pamphlet to prove the descent of Queen Victorian from the ancient kings of Armenia. Since which time the Armenians have been wondering why her Majesty does not annex Armenia to her dominions." This would be merely silly if it were not extremely mischievous. There exists at the Sublime Porte a sort of official Romeike, presided over by an Armenian clerk, whose duty it is to cut out of the foreign newspapers everything he can find that is disagreeable to the Sultan. Those he translates into Turkish, and they are sent up every evening to Yildiz for His Majesty's perusal — en parenthèse, His Majesty must have had a good deal of unpleasant reading during the last few months! Now, when he reads such a paragraph as the above, and finds that it emanates from an association presided over by some of Her Majesty's Cabinet Ministers and Members of Parliament, he, whose mind is eastern and not western, puts his own construction upon it, and comes to the conclusion that it is an indirect but, nevertheless, semi-official suggestion as to the propriety of our annexing a part of his dominions. In another number I find the following questions asked: "Is it not a beautiful sight to see the Armenians of Constantinople going about the streets in rags and tatters rather than, by renouncing their ancient religion, accepting the golden epaulets and decorations of a Pasha?" This is an insinuation that no Armenian can accept office under the Turkish Government unless he turns Muhammedan. There happen to be, at the present moment, no less than eleven Armenian, four or five German, and three English Pashas, not one of whom has ever been requested to change his religion. As to the "rags and tatters," the Armenian population of Constantinople, which is exceedingly active and industrious, is very fairly well off — some few very rich. At least a quarter of the officials in the Government employ are Armenians, for the Turks cannot do without the assistance of their superior intelligence. Moreover, a good third of the commercial and banking interests of Turkey are in the hands of Armenians. On the other hand, undoubtedly the Anglo-Armenian and American-Armenian Associations — by flooding Turkey with revolutionary pamphlets, principally sent over the Persian frontier from Tabriz, where there is a headquarter of Armenian revolutionary propaganda, by notoriously exaggerating the proportions of the unfortunate events which take place in Armenia, and by creating secret societies whose avowed object is the overthrow of the Sultan — have made the very name of Armenia odious to him. Aided by busybodies and notoriety-hunters in England and America, they have greatly impeded the action of the ambassadors, and done more harm to the cause of their compatriots than they can ever undo. The truth must prevail, and the truth about Armenia is terrible enough, without the aid of hysterical sensationalism.

If anyone wishes to form an idea of how Armenian atrocities are manufactured and exaggerated, let him read the Blue-books on "affairs at Aleppo," 1879. The London papers, inspired by the "patriots," announced, with a great flourish of trumpets, that 500 Armenians had been tortured and massacred in the neighbourhood of that city; and there was, so to speak, a great Armenian horrors' boom all over the western world and America too. Well, after all this sensationalism, the number of slain was eventually reduced by our own and the American consuls to eight.

Within the past six weeks the London papers have been gloating over the "atrocities" committed upon Armenians at, and in, Sasoun. The number of the killed was at first 2,000, then 3,000, and finally, thanks to a telegram from Boston, from "one who had received a letter from Sasoun" — how the letter had time to reach America, and how it had been allowed to get out of Turkey, were details never explained! — it was declared that the "massacred Armenians exceeded 10,000." In all these despatches, and in the articles commenting upon them, Sasoun is almost invariably described as a "town" or "village." As a matter of fact Sasoun is neither the one nor the other, but a wild district in the Upper Valley of the Tchai-Batam, a branch of the Tigris, and separated from the basin of the Euphrates by high mountains. It is remoter from Erzeroum, but about equal distance from Diabekir, Mousch, and Bitlis. Nothing can be imagined more terrifically grand than the scenery of this desolate country. The gorges and ravines which cross it are as dreadfully gloomy as the one described by Shelley's Beatrice. A score of cataracts and waterfalls tumble headlong from the black precipices, and gathering together their waters rush desperately towards the Tigris and Euphrates, at the foot of the various dangerous defiles and passes. As a contrast to the stern grandeur of this awe-inspiring scenery are certain smiling valleys and platforms which the Armenians activate with all their well-known industry. This autumn the Khurds happened to select the Sasoun, or Sasounkh as it is called, as the scene of their dreaded exploits.They fell upon the Armenian farmers with a view to stealing their cattle and carrying off their women and provisions. Ths Armenians resisted, and a fight took place, in which at first the farmers seemed to have had a well-earned advantage. Matters grew so serious that a zealous Armenian rode off for help to Bitlis, the Governor of which place lost his head and called to his aid the regular troops reinforced by two regiments of the Hamadyeh, and by the cavalry from Erzeroum, under the command of Zekji Pasha. The Armenians, frightened out of their lives at this display of force, entrenched themselves in the Khandosch Dagh. Pursued by the Hamadeyeh, they were killed in great numbers in their mountain retreats, but the number of slain did not reach 2,000, let alone 10,000, which would certainly exceed the entire population of the district. Most probably it did not pass 1,000. Further than this we really know nothing positive. The papers have condemned the action of both the Governor of Bitlis and of Zekhi Pasha. But is it fair to do so until we are in a position to judge accurately? The capital error made in this ulthappv affair was the bringing upon the scene of the Hamadyeh. When we read of Turkish "regular troops" we are perhaps apt to imagine our own dear Tommy Atkins in a fez: but a Turkish "regular" is very much. of a savage in a sort of German uniform, and when his martial ardour is inflamed in active service, his unamiable traits appear only too conspicuously, and he is apt to commit every sort of atrocity. As to the Hamadyeh [(1) These irregular troops are called after the Sultan.] one of the greatest mistakes ever made was this of : incorporating the Khurds into a sort of well-armed irregular troop. The Sultan] doubtless had in his mind the success of the Russian Emperor with his Cossack regiments, when he gave permission for these barbarians to be supplied with uniforms and, arms. The only distinction they obtained in the war of 1877 was for their blood-curdling atrocities on the poor wretches who fell into their hands, and their diabolical mutilation of the dead. Their head-quarters are at Melaigerd, on the Eastern Euphrates, and there are about thirty regiments of them registered in the area of the piateau, each regiment consisting of from 500 to 600 men. They will not, and possibly cannot, accept discipline, and their natoral savageness is rendered ten times inore dreadful when they are provided with modern arms and ammunition and taught how to use theM.

The Powers ought to insist upon their being immediately disarmed and disbanded. As to their religion, concerning which we have heard so much, they are not Muhammedans except in name-—only savages. The Khurds and their allies the Hamadyeh do not scruple to attack Muhammedans when they have no better prey to hand, and only last year they tied the brother of a Greek I became acquainted with, in Pera to a tree, whilst, they pillaged his farm. I have a copy now before me of his letter to his brother M. X———, describing that unpleasant scene. He would have lost his life but for sonie friendly Turks. Civilisation in Turkey is, I repeat, superficial,and confined to certain classesa in the large towns. The few examples I have given will prove, I hope, sufficiently and satisfactorily that the Armenian atrocities are purposely exaggerated, though for what good purpose I fail to perceive. There is a great deal of excitement in England just now about the matter, but hitherto I have read scarcely a sensible suggestion—unless from Mr. Lynch and Mr. Edward Dicey—as to a possible solution of the question. I do not think it is the policy of the Czar to provoke a conflict with the Turks, and, if victorious, annex the plateau of the Taurus, which is the high road to India, and therefore of vast importance to us. If he thinks so, then this agitation in England is pernicious alike to our own interests and to the Armenians—to our own, because we shall be told we provoked the hostile movement on the part of the Russians against Turkey, as we did in the case of Bulgaria: to the Armenians, for I do not see that this unfortunate people will gain much by passing from the rule of the Sultan to that of the Czar. As to ourselves, what can we do in the matter? Only give the best advice we can to tho Sultan, who is far more likely to accept it if we are civil, than if we are so abominably rude as to declare in our public meetings that even the Ambassador of "such a tyrant" is unfit to kiss the "pure tender hand of our spotless Queen." We have not the remotest idea of going to war for the sake of the fine eyes of the Armenians. If we had we could not, and even if we did, where on earth should we get sufficient troops from, to occupy so vast a tract of country once we had upset the entire machinery of its present administration? The solution of the question is one, I believe, which, time and the advance of civilisation alone can effect. Civilisation must eventually absorb, not only Turkey, but the whole of the East. It will certainly not be solved by untruth, intrigue, self-glorification, mutual admiration and exaggeration. Tnese impede the action of our very able Ambasssador, and irritate the Sultan who, be assured, desires the pacification of his dominions quite as ardently as do Canon McColl, M. Thoumayan, aad Mr. Stevenson. As to the much talked of commission, I believe it will do very little or no good. It will not be able to go further into the interior than Erzeroum, for the journey there at this season of the year is equivalent to an Arctic expedition. The witnesses will be go timid of the eventual eonsequences to themselves of their revelations, that they will say nothing of any importance or else invent. What is really wanted is a European Congress on the subject, to which the Sultan should be invited, not as a refractory naughty boy, but as a great Sovereign who has at heart the welfare of his people. The troubles of Armenia might then be thoroughly invesstigated, and some practicable remedy found for their alleviation. I shall be told that this was done at the Berlin Congress. A close examination of the documents published concerning that Meeting will, I think, clearly prove that, the Congress had altogether too much to do to enter fully into the Armenian question. It was treated very lightly indeed, and the famous Article 61 was passed without mature reflection.

In conclusion I would call attention to another amusing feature of the procedure of the patriots, their endeavour to make their English friends believe that the Armenian religion is a branch, if not a twin sister, of the Church of England as by law established. Hence it is generally spoken of as "holy" and "venerabie" and "national"— epithets which would certainly not be bestowed upon its real twin sister, the scarlei lady of the Vatican. A distinguished gentleman the other day in presenting a chalice from the Armenians to another and much more distinguished gentleman informed him "that the Armenian church was the oldest national church in the world, having been founded by Gregory the Illuininator at the beginning of the fourth century, before Constantine was converted to Christianity." The truth is otherwise. The Armenian chuch did not become national or independent until the Synod of Dovin in 596. Christianity was introduced into Armenia according to universal tradition of the Eastern Churches by the Apostle Bartholomew and Thaddeus. I have elsewhere mentioned the existence of a curious icon in Genoa, which represents, it is stated, the face ofJesus Christ. The legend concerning it, which is still preserved and is written in very ancient Armenian, relates that Abgarus, King of Edessa, having heard of the miracles and wonders wrought by Our Lord, wished to possess himself of His portrait, He therefore sent to Jerusalem an artist named Ananias, who tried in vain to sketch the Divine lineaments. Christ, seeing his fear and sorrow, lest he should have to return with his mission unfulfilled, took the canvas and pressed it upon His face, which remained imprinted upon it. The icon, which is very beautifully painted in the Byzantine style, is surrounded by a series of medallions representing, amongst other things, the conversion of a number of Armenians to the Christian faith by the saints. Bartholomew and Thaddeus. I give the legend for what it is worth. It. however, affords a proof, if one were needed, of the extreme antiquity of the origin of Christianity in their part of the world. Gregory the Illuminator, towards the end of the third century and the beginning of the fourth, gwe form to the lethurgy and ritaal of the Armenian Church, but he neither added nor abstracted to or from those dogmas, which she held in common with tlio Greek and Latin Churches with which she was in communion. Gregory, who was Bishop of Ceasarea, established the chief seat of ecclesiastical administration at Etchmijadzen, where it has remained ever since, but there was a hierarchy long before his time: and as a proof that he did not attempt to render tha Armenian Church independent, he was canonised at a very early period by the Latin Church, and still has his place.in its hagiology among the doctors of the Church. St. John Chrysostom was in intimate communication with the Armnenian bishops, who received him in his exile with profound reverence, which he would certainly not have allowed had they, at this period, been monophysites, It was, therefore, not till the year 560, that is, nearly three hundred years after the death of Gregory the llluminator, that the Armenian Church became national in the full meaning of that term. Then it adopted the monophysite doctrine, that in Christ thrre was but one nature, a heresy which has never been accepted by any of the Western Protestant Churches, by whom the Armenian Gregorian or National Church must logically be considered heretical. It is possibly owing to this doctrine that the Armenians use pure wine, without the addition of any water, in the Mass. Beyond this doctrine and the non-recognition of the Papal supremacy, the Armenian Church and the Latin differ so slightly than when an Armenian Gregorian or schismatie passes over to Rome, he finds in the united branch of this Church no change whatever in liturgy or ritual. I defy any casual observer to tell the difference which exists between the two Churches in matter of ceremonial and general arrangement. In both he will see the same three altars, raised on a marble platform about four feet high, the center one, a mass of artificial flowers and lights towering up to the ceiling, being the high altar. It is screened at the moment of the Consecration of the Host by by a gorgeous curtain drawn round a circular pole of brass, exactly like the curtain of a "tester" bedstead. The priests wear the same beautiful flowing robes, perform exactly the same ceremonies to the accompaniment of a delightfully picturesque orchestra, consisting of a band of acolytes who, seated in a circle in front of the altar, beat upon tambourines, cymbals, and little drums,whilst they chant in the usual nasal tones of the East the various hymns and psalms appropriate to the service.

The use of images, or pictures, is less exaggerated thatn in the Latin and Greek Churches, but they are vvenerated nevertheless, and the relies of the saints on certain festivals are presented to the faithful to kiss. The Virgin Mother and other saints are invoked, and they have their shrines and sacred pools and wells, precisely as in the Greek and Roman Churches. In short, as I have already said, the difference between the two religions is very slight, Mgr. Azarian, the Catholic Patriarch of Constantinople, assured me that when an Armenian congregation joins the Roman, no change whatever is made in their ritual; the priests are not reconsecrated, and they are allowed to retain their wives. I may here add that Mass is said in the old Armenian language in both Churches. It was not until 1827 that the Roman Catholic Armenian Church was thoroughly organized. There is, however, a complete and unbroken list of the Armenian patriarchs who never subscribed to the monophysite doctrine from the time of the Council of Dovin to the present; and the last of these is Mgr. Azarian, the actual Romano-Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople. This Chu ch has a well-organized hierarohy, and numbers some 110,000 members, principally, however, in the large towns, for which reason they are rarely comprised in the troubles which afflict the rural districts. In the annals of the Dominican Friars at Galata, I found a number of entries for the payment of sermons preached by them in the Gregorian churches in the last century. This seems to me a proof that the monophysite heresy, although the original cause of the schism with the Greek and Latin Churches, has never been well defined by the Gregorians.

There are only two regular orders in either the Latin or Gregorian Church -- the Hermit of St. Anthony of Egypt and the Basilians. The Mechitarists of Venice are Latin Basilians. The priests are allowed to marry once, ia both Churches, and the Bishops are only selected from the regular clergy. The GGregorians have the same orders as the Roman Catholics, and like them reckon the Subdiaconate among the greatest orders. In the seventeenth century, I feel persuaded, the Gregorian Church in Asia Minor felt the influence of the Catholic revival in the East under the Jesuits. The decoration of the high altar is exactly like the Roman, being surcharged with artificial ilowers and lights. Then, too, unlike the Greeks, they allow of a certain amount of progress in art, and do not scruple to use images manifestly imported from Italy, and mostly by inferior seventeenth century artists. At about this period, too, the tall Roman mitre was introduced, and this is essentially post-Reformation in its design. Blue vestments are used on feasts of the Yirgin in both the Gregorian aad the United Church.

Of the very numerous works written on the Armenian Church, th best will be found to be La Quinn's Oriens Chritianus; La Patriarcat Armenien, of L. D. Vernier; the Pere de Damas' Aremnie: and the very elaborate, most erudite aud curious Storia del Armenia, published by the Friars of the Mechitarist Monastery, at Venice in 1782.

RICHARD DAVEY